About your Search

20130203
20130203
STATION
CNN 6
CNNW 6
MSNBC 3
MSNBCW 3
CSPAN 2
KQED (PBS) 2
KNTV (NBC) 1
KRCB (PBS) 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
WRC (NBC) 1
WUSA (CBS) 1
LANGUAGE
English 31
Search Results 0 to 30 of about 31 (some duplicates have been removed)
are actually doing pretty dam well. >> trade balance will be an all issue two. heat over hagel. commander in chief barack obama has nominated charles chuck hagel for secretary of defense. hagel testified before the senate armed services committed tee this week. is senator john mccain grilling hagel about hagel's opposition to the surge in iraq in 2007. >> were you correct in your judgment. >> i would defer that to history. >> when you were right or wrong about the surge. >> i'll explain why i played those comments. >> i want to know if you were right or wrong. that is a direct question. i expect a direct answer. >> senator hagel explained he opposed the surge in iraq because it cost nearly 1200 american lives. >> i saw the consequences and the suffering and the horror of war. so i did question a surge. i always ask the question, is this going to be worth the sacrifice? because there will be sacrifice. >> that was hagel's emphasis on the cost factor. my question is this. his emphasis on the cost factor in military decisions, does it serve as a dodge to senator mccain's bullet? or did he me
. >> chuck hagel and the battle for the pentagon. >> the good news is, for the verse time in many years, republicans and democrats seem ready to tackle this problem together. >> the immigration problem. has somebody been reading exit polls? >> too many children are dying. too many children. >> also, the fight over gonds. >> law-abiding gun owners will not accept the blame for acts of violence or deranged criminals. >> the word on hillary in 2016. will she or won't she? >> i have no plans to run. >> thursday was not a good day for chuck hagel, president obama's tourist to be his next defense secretary. his old friend and fellow vietnam veteran john mccain jump all over hagel for opposing the surge in iraq. >> were you correct or incorrect when you said the search would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam? correct or incorrect? yes or no? are you going to answer the question, senator hagel? the question is, were you right or wrong? i would like to answer whether you were right or wrong. and you are free to elaborate. >> i am not going to give you a y
, former republican senator chuck hagel, came under fire from members of his own party during a very contentious confirmation hearing. >> name one person in your opinion who's intimidated by the israeli lobby in the united states senate. >> are we right or wrong? that's a pretty straightforward question. >> senator hagel, please answer the question i asked. today, do you think unilateral sanctions would be a bad idea? >> all this raising questions about how effective chuck hagel will be if confirmed as secretary of defense. earlier this weekend, i sat down for a rare joint interview with the top military leadership the outgoing secretary f defense leon panetta and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff general martin dempsey. >>> secretary panetta, welcome back to "meet the press." general dempsey, welcome. let me start with the man that is poised to take your place. he underwent on thursday a pretty tough round of questioning. he seemed to struggle with a lot of the answers. of course this is chuck hagel, the former republican senator from nebraska. look at some of his answers. >
-- defense secretary nominee, chuck hagel responded to questions concerning past statements on israel, iran, and nuclear weapons. this portion of the hearing is three hours. cable satellite corp. 2013] >> good morning, everybody. the committee meets today to consider the nomination of former senator chuck hagel to be secretary of defense. before i begin, i want to first welcome senator inhofe as the new ranking republican on our committee, succeeding senator mccain. senator mccain has been a great partner over the past six years, and i thank him for all the work he has done to get bills enacted, his leadership on a host of issues, his support for the work of this committee, and for always keeping our hearings likely. -- lively. senator inhofe has shown his strong commitment to the national defense over his 20 years on this committee. and i know that we are going to work well together and continue the bipartisan tradition of the committee. we are also pleased to welcome the eight senators who are joining the committee this year, both of those who are new to the senate and those who are new t
this is chuck hagel, the former republican senator from nebraska. look at some of his answers. >> i should have used another term, and i'm sorry. i would like to go back and change the words and the meaning. the bigger point is, what i was saying, i think -- what i meant to say, should have said, is recognizable. it's been recognized, is recognized. well, i said it. and i don't remember the context or when i said it. well, i said what i said. i said many, many things over many years. that's what i should have said. and thank you. >> secretary panetta, many of those answers did not satisfy a lot of republicans. senator roy blunt is going to vote no. he said his answers were too inconsistent particularly related to iran and israel. marco rubio said i've been deeply concerned about his plef previous comments. john barrasso, he appeared weak and wobbly. are you concerned? >> well, everyone you quoted is a republican, and it's pretty obvious that the political knives were out for chuck hagel. >> and you think that was totally personal, partisan? >> well, what disappointed me is they talked a lot abo
-off hagel, is it just for show? the basic unfairness of vietnam itself that some went and some didn't? is it about lyndon johnson's inability to win the war or end it? what is it about john mccain that seems to excite those who know nothing about vietnam. well tonight we dig into the deep well of resentment burning in john mccain's patriotic heart. a resentment not against the north vietnamese who imprisoned and tortured him, not against george w. bush and his political henchmen who tried to stain mccain's reputation. but just like he did, in the same army of america's long nightmare in vietnam. i'm joined by david corn with "mother jones" and joy reed with the grio. i have to tell you i'm convinced we're watching a flashback. watch this, here's senator john mccain, he did a long, angry wind-up before he launched into his first so-called question. it was really an indictment for former senate colleague and former friend and fellow vietnam veteran, chuck hagel. it included put-downs, as well as reference does vietnam. let's listen. >> in january of 2007, in a rather bizarre exchange
during the hearings of hillary clinton and even chuck hagel. >> heather: so not iminformed responses. i'll toss this question to you. they did indict the department of state, this is a quote, with shocking irresponsibility to protect american personnel at benghazi. the fact is the intelligence community and the department of state, they were sharing reports mostly provided by the c.i.a. for months that were outlining the growing threat in benghazi and, indeed, it was focused on western influence particularly the u.s. those requests early on for additional security prior to the attack went unanswered. you are satisfied with that response from panetta? >> yeah, i think what is being lost is the fact there has been an accountability review of all of this. they have laid out a number of recommendations. thef been agreed to by hillary clinton, by the president, by a number of people. we're not really at this point getting a lot new information. what is being lost in the context lindsay graham's request to have another hearing with will have papa. it's supposed -- leon panetta. there is a lot
hearing for chuck hagel was an omni directional embarrassing debacle for everyone involved. first there was the senate republican republicans. republican senator after republican senator threw questions at hagel that even by the debate standards of a nominating hearing were the cheapest kind of demagoguery and bullying. >> why do you think that the iranian foreign ministry so strongly supports your nomination to be the secretary of defense? >> to go on al jazeera, a foreign network broadcasting propaganda to nations that are hostile to us and to explicitly agree with the characterization of the united states as the world's bully, i would suggest is not the conduct one would expect of a secretary of defense. >> you continue to fold, i believe, extreme views far to the left of even this administration. >> if you were a visitor from another country and you just listen to hagel's republican interlocaters, you would have had to ask where did this moral monster come from? and the answer is, of course, is mostly in the republican senate caucus. watching lindsay graham make the pained gas
senator from nebraska says he will support chuck hagel's nomination for defense secretary, saying that he earned the endorsement after testifying on the hill last week. he is the second republican to publicly back hagel. democrats have largely supported president obama's pick to follow outcomegoing secretary leon panetta. the new poll shows the federal government is not popular with the american public. a majority of americans thinks it threatens their personal rights and freedom. let's talk about it. david mercer and former rnc spokesperson is here for a fair and balanced debate about why everybody's so cranky. good to see you both. >> good tesee you. >> so now, we believe it's the first time in the history of the poll who have a majority of american who is say they are not happy with the federal government. >> in the poll, if you look deep into it, it says outright that conservative republicans who in 2010 had a 62%... feeling of being threatened by the government, now it's up to 76%. so i think that's largely driving this new number that we are seeing in the poll, which is to say, what
chief chairman general martin dempsey on the hagel hearings, world hot spots and benghazi. >> this is not 911. you can't call in two minutes and expect a team in place. >> then the president's agenda. >> comprehensive immigration reform. prevent something like newtown or oak creek from happening again. >> what about jobs? with former obama policy adviser mellody barnes, former labor secretary elaine chao and a conversation about football and kids with the mvp of super bowl xl hines ward. i'm candy crowley. this is "state of the union." joining me now leon panetta secretary of defense and martin dempsey, chairman of the chief joint of staff. gentlemen, thank you both for being here. we had very interesting hearings on thursday for your replacement. i want to play you just a little bit from those hearings. >> the iranian's red line, persian gulf, some of the iranian questions you asked, i support the president's strong position on containment. by the way, i've just been handed a note that i misspoke. we don't have a position on containment. >> just to make sure your correcti
. >> outstanding defense secretary leon panetta and joint chief chairman martin dempsey on the hagel hearings, hospitals and benghazi. >> this is not 911. you can't call in two minutes and expect a team in place. >> then the president's agenda. >> comprehensive immigration reform. prevent something like newtown hopefully from happening again. >> what about jobs? with former obama policy adviser meld barnes, former labor secretary elaine chao, mvp super bowl xl hines ward. i'm candy crowley and this is "state of the union." joining me now leon panetta secretary of defense and martin dempsey, chairman of the chief joint of staff. i want to play you a little of the hearings. >> as to the iranians red line persian gulf, some of the iranian questions you asked. i support the president's strong position on containment. by the way, i've just been handed a note that i misspoke. we don't have a position on containment. >> just to make sure your correction is clear. we do have a position on containment, which is we do not favor containment. >> we do not favor containment. >> i'm sure you've seen the cr
could work this week on the chuck hagel nomination. the question remains whether or not republicans will block the nomination with a filibuster. the president traveling to push for slacker gun laws. with the nation focusing on the super bowl, we want to turn to washington's role on regulating the nfl. we will use super bowl sunday to talk about government regulations when it comes to the issue of steroids or head injuries. the phone lines are open. let's begin with a look at some of the headlines courtesy of the museum. from "the san francisco chronicle" -- from "the baltimore sun" -- let's turn to the politics and policy behind the nfl. this is a story a few days ago from "the washington post." outlining a plan and a letter to the executive director of the players union. they agreed as part of a 2011 collective bargaining agreement that the players should be tested for hgh, but the two sides of that agreed. two seasons have been played without it. last weekend in new orleans, roger goodell was asked a number of questions including one on the issue of head injuries. here is more fro
the unions. but the high murders was 2,500 a year. now it's about 400. when you saw the atoimt of chuck hagel you were outspoken. >> fistly, i don't think he's anti-semitic. i have no basis for saying that. i do believe he's hostile to israel, but he has a right to his position. tom friedman, his first sponsor that i read in his column said he is not mainstream. this is tom friedman who is advocating hagel. then his opponents say he's not main treatment. why would you want a guy who's not mainstream in charge one of the biggest appointments, the defense department. if you don't believe in sanctions and you don't believe in war, what do you think we should do as it relates to stopping iran from getting the nuclear bomb? he believes that there should be much greater light distance, separation between israel and the united states. so as to make the arab countries more friendly to us. they want to kill us. they want to kill christians and jews and they say they're going to convert either voluntarily or by force. and that's been their history. so why would we want to jettison, which is really the
Search Results 0 to 30 of about 31 (some duplicates have been removed)